{"page":"https://casescribe.ai/explorer/conditions/facial-nerve-vii-cranial-nerve-paralysis","generated_at":"2026-10-03T18:34:22.667Z","data_as_of":{"decisions":944125,"first_year":2017,"last_year":2026,"latest_decision":"2026-04-30","cfr":"2026-10-01","m21":"2026-09-29"},"about":{"publisher":"CaseScribe AI (VA Law Explorer)","source":"Public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (appeals of VA decisions, not VA's first decisions), M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, 38 CFR Parts 3 and 4.","method":"Outcomes are issue-level: each condition the Board decided in a decision counts once. Decision data is extracted by AI and can contain errors. Rates describe past appeals and do not predict any claim.","disclaimer":"For research only. CaseScribe AI is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Verify figures against the source decisions and regulations.","attribution":"Cite as: VA Law Explorer, CaseScribe AI, with the page URL."},"data":{"condition":"Facial nerve (vii cranial nerve) paralysis","all_conditions_granted_pct":19.4,"decisions":1221,"years":"2017-2026","granted_pct":16.1,"denied_pct":37.9,"remanded_pct":45.7,"granted_on_merits_pct":29.8,"by_year":[{"year":2017,"issues":93,"granted_pct":9.7,"denied_pct":45.2,"remanded_pct":38.7},{"year":2018,"issues":149,"granted_pct":13.4,"denied_pct":42.3,"remanded_pct":43},{"year":2019,"issues":147,"granted_pct":15.6,"denied_pct":38.1,"remanded_pct":45.6},{"year":2020,"issues":139,"granted_pct":9.4,"denied_pct":44.6,"remanded_pct":44.6},{"year":2021,"issues":149,"granted_pct":13.4,"denied_pct":36.9,"remanded_pct":48.3},{"year":2022,"issues":146,"granted_pct":14.4,"denied_pct":27.4,"remanded_pct":56.8},{"year":2023,"issues":164,"granted_pct":16.5,"denied_pct":39.6,"remanded_pct":43.3},{"year":2024,"issues":174,"granted_pct":21.3,"denied_pct":29.3,"remanded_pct":47.7},{"year":2025,"issues":134,"granted_pct":20.1,"denied_pct":38.1,"remanded_pct":38.8},{"year":2026,"issues":76,"granted_pct":22.4,"denied_pct":44.7,"remanded_pct":27.6}],"benefit_of_doubt_in_grants_pct":65,"evidence_on_merits":[{"evidence":"va_exam_favorable","decisions_with":149,"granted_pct_with":55.2,"granted_pct_without":24.4},{"evidence":"va_exam_unfavorable","decisions_with":845,"granted_pct_with":27.1,"granted_pct_without":40},{"evidence":"nexus_positive","decisions_with":170,"granted_pct_with":63.6,"granted_pct_without":21.7},{"evidence":"nexus_negative","decisions_with":556,"granted_pct_with":28.2,"granted_pct_without":31.6},{"evidence":"private_opinion","decisions_with":344,"granted_pct_with":42,"granted_pct_without":24.3},{"evidence":"treating_physician","decisions_with":61,"granted_pct_with":62.8,"granted_pct_without":27.6},{"evidence":"lay_statement","decisions_with":942,"granted_pct_with":26.4,"granted_pct_without":46.1},{"evidence":"combat_service","decisions_with":67,"granted_pct_with":34.2,"granted_pct_without":29.6}],"top_reasons":{"granted":[{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":19},{"reason":"caused by the service-connected disability","decisions":16},{"reason":"service connection established","decisions":8},{"reason":"criteria for 10 percent rating met","decisions":4},{"reason":"service connection granted","decisions":3},{"reason":"10 percent rating granted","decisions":3}],"denied":[{"reason":"no current diagnosis","decisions":56},{"reason":"va examiner: less likely than not related to service","decisions":35},{"reason":"no in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis","decisions":34},{"reason":"preponderance of the evidence against the claim","decisions":30},{"reason":"service records negative or silent","decisions":26},{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":16}]},"recent_examples":{"granted":[{"case_id":"A26040688","year":2026,"judge":"D. JOHNSON","rationale":"Current diagnosis of essential tremor.; Private medical opinion found it more likely than not related to TERA.; Board found private opinion more persuasive than VA opinion."},{"case_id":"A26031757","year":2026,"judge":"MICHAEL J. SKALTSOUNIS","rationale":"VA examiner noted dysphonia likely secondary to tracheostomy-related trauma; Examiner's opinion found inadequate as it denied service connection despite acknowledging intermediate factor; Evidence in approximate balance, benefit of doubt applied"},{"case_id":"26004241","year":2026,"judge":"DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER","rationale":"VA examination confirmed cranial nerve impairment manifested by drooling.; VA examiner provided positive nexus opinion linking drooling to service-connected myasthenia gravis.; Opinion based on examination, review of claims file, medical literature, and thorough rationale."}],"denied":[{"case_id":"A26037314","year":2026,"judge":"M. C. WILSON","rationale":"No competent evidence of current slurred speech; No persistent symptoms of slurred speech post-service; In-service lip injury conceded, but no link to slurred speech established"},{"case_id":"A26036837","year":2026,"judge":"H.M. WALKER","rationale":"No current temporomandibular joint condition diagnosed.; Insufficient objective evidence for diagnosis.; Service treatment records showed temporomandibular joint within normal limits."},{"case_id":"26004672","year":2026,"judge":"B. MULLINS","rationale":"No medical opinions supported a direct link between the in-service fall and the subsequent hemiparesis.; VA doctor opined hemiparesis was due to post-service conditions (hypertension, diabetes), not in-service fall.; VA opinions found mood disorder not pathophysiologically related to hemiparesis and… [truncated, 22 chars omitted]"}]},"how_va_rates":null,"rules":[]}}